ILNews

Opinions Jan. 17, 2013

January 17, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Daniel Brewington v. State of Indiana
15A01-1110-CR-550
Criminal. Reverses convictions and sentences for intimidation of Dr. Edward Connor and intimidation of Heidi Humphrey and remands with instructions to vacate, which does not alter Daniel Brewington’s aggregate sentence. Affirms conviction for intimidation of Judge James Humphrey and for attempted obstruction of justice relating to Connor. Affirms in all other respects.

Steven A. Ballaban v. Bloomington Jewish Community, Inc., a/k/a Congregation Beth Shalom, Paul Eisenberg, Judith Rose, Sarah Wasserman, Lynne Foster Shifriss, and Roberta "Didi" Kerler
53A01-1207-CT-315
Civil tort. Affirms denial of Ballaban’s motion to correct error and the grant of summary judgment in favor of the Bloomington Jewish Community Inc. and other appellees on his complaint after he was fired as rabbi for Beth Shalom. Finds evidence supporting the ruling that the ministerial exception applies. Denies appellees’ request for attorney fees. Judges Vaidik and Bailey concur in result in separate opinions.  

Kyle W. Dixon v. Ara J. Dixon
34A05-1206-DR-303
Domestic relation. Affirms order granting the notice of intent to relocate filed by Ara Dixon. The mother’s intent to relocate was made in good faith and not in haste, and father would be able to maintain virtually the same parenting time schedule.

Marilyn Carter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1206-CR-457
Criminal. Affirms convictions for Class A misdemeanors resisting law enforcement and battery.

B.B., Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1205-JV-228
Juvenile.  Affirms adjudication as a delinquent for having committed what would be Class A misdemeanor cruelty to an animal if committed by an adult.

Jeff Clade v. Hunt Construction Group, Inc. (NFP)
49A02-1206-CT-509
Civil tort.  Grants rehearing to clarify original opinion and affirms, in which the Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment for Hunt on a negligence claim. Judge Riley would deny rehearing.

Steven Newville v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1205-CR-379
Criminal. Affirms Class A felony conviction of attempted rape.

Garrick P. Twiford, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A04-1205-CR-284
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony child molesting.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT